Martyn dropped from test squad

Well there doesn't seem to be a thread for this yet, so I thought I should start one.

Hayden was also dropped from the ODI squad, and Gillespie and Kasprowicz from both, all of which are understandable, but Martyn was, prior to the Ashes series, one of the best batsmen in the world, and dominated consistently last year.

Why does one poor series, in which he had some poor decisions as well, warrant being dropped from the team? Even dropping Hayden would have been a bit of an overreaction given his century in the final game, but dropping the guy who was the most in-form Australian batsmen a couple of months ago and has had four poor tests is simply inexplicable. I don't usually criticise the selectors, but this is surely the worst selection decision in recent memory, from any country.

It does seem startlingly harsh to me. Martyn is being made to carry the can for a whole top 7 who didn't really perform (Langer possibly excepted). I think Hayden's ton @ The Oval has clouded the issue a bit. Yes, it was an admirable innings but it was made on the best batting track of the series & at a funereal (by Hayden's standards) pace. On day 4 the rest of the line-up basically had to try to score quickly in twilight with the ball swinging. Twice Langer & Hayden took the light when it was offered to them, despite an obvious need for rapid runs.

Personally I'd have said Katich should have been the one if Hayden was retained. Martyn is clearly the more fluent bat & has a proven track record. I guess the extra 3 (?) years have counted against Damien.

"The PFA does not represent players when they have broken the law and been convicted on non-football matters."- Gordon Taylor in 2009 following Marlon King's release after a prison sentence for sexual assault & ABH

Personally I'd have said Katich should have been the one if Hayden was retained. Martyn is clearly the more fluent bat & has a proven track record. I guess the extra 3 (?) years have counted against Damien.

Well yeah, assuming the selectors feel that Watson needed to be picked (and I agree), Katich was the man to go. Failing him, Hayden.

Well there doesn't seem to be a thread for this yet, so I thought I should start one.

Hayden was also dropped from the ODI squad, and Gillespie and Kasprowicz from both, all of which are understandable, but Martyn was, prior to the Ashes series, one of the best batsmen in the world, and dominated consistently last year.

Why does one poor series, in which he had some poor decisions as well, warrant being dropped from the team? Even dropping Hayden would have been a bit of an overreaction given his century in the final game, but dropping the guy who was the most in-form Australian batsmen a couple of months ago and has had four poor tests is simply inexplicable. I don't usually criticise the selectors, but this is surely the worst selection decision in recent memory, from any country.

.

Someone was always going to pay the price for Australia losing the Ashes. The bottom line is that, regardless of past form, Martyn, Hayden and Gilchrist's batting, cost Australia the Ashes (among other things). Losing the Ashes is huge. I just don't see that it's such a big surprise that either Hayden or Martyn was left out of the Test side. Five Tests in which to show something, is ample opportunity. By the way, Slow Love, you owe me $20

Once again CA prove they pick players based on who they like and who is more marketable rather than form. I'm all for Watson being in, but to drop Martyn before Haydern is a disgrace, espically with Jacques pressing so hard.

As I pointed out in the Super Series thread, this comes at quite a surprise to me. I was 100% sure the selectors would use Katich as a scapegoat and drop him from the test squad, as I figured Martyn's 2004-05 season form would keep him in the team, particularly his SL and India tours. Its amazing that three months ago people were debating at whether Martyn was in the top 5 batsmen in the world. Now he's not even in the Australian test squad coming up to take on the rest of the world. Amazing how things change after one series.

I disagree with the decision, but I am happy that they kept Katich in the squad as I still rate him quite highly. Maybe Martyn's age had something to do with the decision? Seeing as Katich is younger, it is a possible reason. I mean surely the selectors don't have such a short-term memory that they forget what Martyn did for them 12 months ago in India, and he wasn't poor in any test series after the Indian tour but before the Ashes was he?

So basically, Hayden scores one ton after how many innings (I've lost count) and is kept in the test team, whilst Martyn has one bad series (including 2 poor LBW decisions if my memory serves me correct) and is dropped. Amazing.

Last edited by Jono; 20-09-2005 at 07:10 AM.

"I am very happy and it will allow me to have lot more rice."

Eoin Morgan on being given a rice cooker for being Man of the Match in a Dhaka Premier Division game.

Someone was always going to pay the price for Australia losing the Ashes. The bottom line is that, regardless of past form, Martyn, Hayden and Gilchrist's batting, cost Australia the Ashes (among other things). Losing the Ashes is huge. I just don't see that it's such a big surprise that either Hayden or Martyn was left out of the Test side. Five Tests in which to show something, is ample opportunity. By the way, Slow Love, you owe me $20

Ha, yeah, I posted to you in the Super Series thread about this (somehow I missed this thread).

As to this decision, I think it boggles the mind. You keep couching it in the terms "Hayden or Martyn", but the truth is, nobody would have been surprised by Hayden being left out of the squad. People might have been scanning the names to see if Martyn made it, but only because they couldn't believe the selectors would be so stupid about it. Really dumb decision in my opinion - I'm also a bit confused as to why he's been retained in the ODI squad - if you were going to drop him for one of these, wouldn't that make more sense? Although capable in the one-day game, I've always thought of Martyn as more of a test player.

And they can't pull any of this "we keep the form in those games seperate" business, because clearly they don't.

"Youre known for having a liking for men who look like women."
- Linda

"FFS I'm sick and tired of having to see a bloke bend over to pick something up or lean over and see their arse crack. For christ's sake pull your pants up or buy some underpants you bogan because nobody want's to see it. And this is a boat building shed (well one of them) not a porn studio."
- Craig

Martyn's exclusion was completely unfair however I still prefer that to the decision of Hopes over Hayden!

I think they could just have easily played Martyn as 12th man if they wanted to use Hodge, MacGill or Watson. I don't see the point of dropping him from the squad completely as he should DEFINITELY play against the Windies.

I don't know what the selectors see in James Hopes. He had a good season but isn't a good enough batsman or bowler alone to deserve a place for Queensland. Obviously his ability to open the batting was taken into account but I can't imagine him being affective against the likes of Pollock and whoever else is in the World XI team.

However, I do agree with the exclusion of Gillespie/Kasprowicz and the inclusion of Nathan Bracken

Only a bunch of convicts having been beaten 3-0 and gone 9 tests without a win and won just 1 in 11 against England could go into the home series saying they will win. England will win in Australia again this winter as they are a better side which they have shown this summer. 3-0 doesn't lie girls.

Ha, yeah, I posted to you in the Super Series thread about this (somehow I missed this thread).

As to this decision, I think it boggles the mind. You keep couching it in the terms "Hayden or Martyn", but the truth is, nobody would have been surprised by Hayden being left out of the squad. .

It's couched in those terms because I think they wish to stagger the exit of the older players, and losing the Ashes (and Martyn and Hayden both struggling) has presented them with an opportunity (for want of a better word) to pension one of the older guys off. Previously, they couldn't drop anyone, as the runs were flowing as freely as the beer at Trafalgar Square last week.

I can't see the logic in playing two 30 year olds over a 33 year old just because of the age difference. Unless a huge group of young Australians mature into test cricketers in the space of 3 years they're just delaying the inevitable and ruining Australia's chances "now"

Martyn will still be going strong by the time the 2007 World Cup comes so this for me is a no-brainer

This is one of the surprising and unfair axing's that comes to mind, and one bad series means you are out, the one comparable case is Steve Waugh's sacking from the ODI team three years ago, but this carried on a precident, if you lose a big series then a big name player will take the fall even though he probably didn't deserve it, if Hayden got dropped he would have deserved it more then say Martyn.

If you are going to make sacking, how about Ponting's captaincy or the coach?

Beware the lollipop of mediocrity. Lick once and you suck forever...

RIP Fardin Qayyumi, a true legend of CW

Originally Posted by Boobidy

Bradman never had to face quicks like Sharma and Irfan Pathan. He wouldn't of lasted a ball against those 2, not to mention a spinner like Sehwag.

Horrible horrible horrible ... we lose our first series in over four years and we drop one of our best batsmen. Those selectors need a check-up ... also, he is still in the ODI team, which I feel he is not really contributing to much lately. Wake me up guys !!!

i couldn't believe they dropped Martyn. hes done poorly in 1 series in like the last 2 years..... Hayden hasn't had a good series for like 2 years. Selectors finally make a big call but not the right one for mine.